An invitation from Intel confirms that the company will introduce its Sandy Bridge next-generation processors during its keynote at the Consumer Electronics Show on Jan. 5th, a new report claims.

According to the invitation, Intel PC Client Group general manager Mooly Eden will show off the new processors, which will include the "world's fastest processor," at CES, Electronista reports. The new processors are expected to replace the Nehalem line of chips currently used in Apple's Core i5 and i7-equipped iMacs and MacBook Pros.

"Desktop chips will range from dual 2.5 GHz Core i3s to quad 3.4 GHz Core i7s. Regular notebooks will get dual 2.5GHz to 2.7GHz Core i5 and i7 chips in the first batch of processors, and desktop replacements will get quad 2.2GHz through to 2.5GHz Core i7s," the report noted. Taiwanese industry publication Digitimes reported Monday that low-power Sandy Bridge processors will be coming to Intel's Huron River platform, which is also due for a Q1 2011 release.

During an earnings call in July, Intel CEO Paul Otellini said he was "more excited by Sandy Bridge" than any product that the company has launched "in a number of years." "Due to the very strong reception of Sandy Bridge, we have accelerated our 32-nanometer factory ramp and have raised our capex guidance to enable us to meet the anticipated demand," continued Otellini.

At the time, Intel was expected to release the processors at the end of this year, with Apple then incorporating them into its Mac lineup in early 2011. In 2009, Apple was the first PC maker to release a Nehalem-based system.

Despite falling behind in the mobile market, Intel has done well for itself. The world's largest chipmaker posted record earnings for the September quarter, with quarterly revenue exceeding $11 billion for the first time in the Santa Clara, Calif., company's history. Though Otellini remained optimistic about Intel's continued success, he did acknowledge that the iPad and other tablets are beginning to cannibalize PC margins.

In a company memo in October, Otellini admitted that Intel is losing the mobile race to Apple, which has gained a massive head start with the success of the iPhone and iPad, but he reassured employees that Intel was running a "marathon" and would catch up eventually.

Otellini cited Intel's come from behind to capture 90 percent of the server market as a prior example. I am also very optimistic about our opportunity in tablets and smartphones, even though we are not first to market with a solution, Otellini said. Ultimately, we can and will lead.

Apple has reportedly been dissatisfied with the drop in battery life that comes with using Intel's Atom chips. Early rumors suggested that an Apple tablet would sport an Atom chip, but Apple eventually went with a custom System on a Chip that used ARM reference designs.

So Intel's bundlegate continues unabated. Shovelling you useless GPUs while Nvidia and others still have no chance of using their chipsets or integrated GPUs. Intel makes some great CPUs, but it's certainly stabbed a few people in the back on the way there. And now with Sandy Bridge, it's secured its stranglehold on mainstream and performance CPUs, and mopped up the low end GPU market at the same time.

Looks like lower-end/ 11"/ 13" Macbook/Pros in 2011 will still continue to use Core 2 Duo.

I admit, I would love a thinned-down, no-optical-drive, 256GB SSD, Sandy Bridge i5 MacBook Pro 15".
But I have come to the stage where I wouldn't even know what I'd do with that speed at power.

Dang, my first ever MBP bought this summer (I use MacPros normally), an i7, is about to be made obsolete! I guess it will fetch a good price on e-bay in a year or two though and I'll upgrade. Got do my part to help that AAPL stock! LOL

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

It appears that Sandy Bridge will not natively support USB 3.0. This makes me a sad panda.

Quote:

Originally Posted by msantti

Intel seems less and less interested in keeping Apple as a client.

The market is heading towards powerful low power processors and Intel is mostly interested in the high end.

I don’t see that. Intel keeps making their chips more power efficient with increased performance and it seems that each chip Apple buys is at ≈$250 or more in 1ku lots. Whilst other vendors buy more chips from Intel for their consumer end, Apple is buying all expensive chips. Nary a $50 Atom chip on the shopping list At 4M Macs per quarter that is $1 Billion in revenue.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

This doesn't tell us anything we didn't know already, but it's nice that Intel has now confirmed it. This is good news for the next MacBook Pro refresh.

I am sure we will see a new MBP line-up appear in January at an Apple event. it is not clear whether Apple versions of Sandy Bridge will get a discrete graphics processor, although it certainly looks likely for the 15" and 17" models based on past history and the weakness of Intel's own GPU modules. Given the 13" MBP's price-point, it could get a fully integrated Intel GPU, depending on whether Intel has been able to develop something better than existing options in this area of the market. With or without a discrete GPUs, we should see a worthwhile lift in performance for all MBPs.

I am guessing that Apple will not drop the internal DVD drive yet from any MBP model just yet, not only to maintain the MacBook Air's uniqueness, but also because the Air comes close to matching the performance of existing 13" MBPs. I think Apple will say that, for the time being, If you want a 13" laptop without a DVD drive, get the Air.

What I really hope Apple does is make SSD hard drives standard in the MBP without ramping up the price too much. I'd like to see 256Gb, 512Gb and even a 1TB option (wonder what that would cost!). We certainly need larger capacity drives. My disk is full - full of photos, movies, music and other stuff downloaded from iTunes. If Steve wants us to continue shopping on iTunes, then he needs to give us more room to store our sh*t.

I am also expecting new hi-resolution displays.

An unknown factor is whether Apple will now include USB 3.0. it is fast approaching prime time and the sooner Apple adopts it, the better IMO.

I'd like to see a 13" MBP offered with the same processors as a 15" MBP for crunching large graphics intensive programmes such as video editing and speadsheets.

All in all, these will be fast machines with stunning screens that offer a slick user experience. The only downside is that the form factor will not have changed which means they'll weigh just as much as before.

The market is heading towards powerful low power processors and Intel is mostly interested in the high end.

the i Core CPU's are very power efficient. ARM is more power efficient but not as powerful. Intel has won a lot of design wins in embedded systems with the Atom, but they haven't been made public and no Intel Inside stickers on TV's.

idiot AMD sold their embedded systems business right about the time the iPhone came out and the market took off

Apple is maybe 10% of Intel's business and most of their CPU's are cheaper i3's compared to the i5's and i7's everyone else buys. Intel graphics are more than enough for most people and Acer and others are content with 4% net margins. Only reason Apple puts a dedicated GPU is to charge more and be able to make more profit.

I am sure we will see a new MBP line-up appear in January at an Apple event. it is not clear whether Apple versions of Sandy Bridge will get a discrete graphics processor, although it certainly looks likely for the 15" and 17" models based on past history and the weakness of Intel's own GPU modules. Given the 13" MBP's price-point, it could get a fully integrated Intel GPU, depending on whether Intel has been able to develop something better than existing options in this area of the market. With or without a discrete GPUs, we should see a worthwhile lift in performance for all MBPs.

I am guessing that Apple will not drop the internal DVD drive yet from any MBP model just yet, not only to maintain the MacBook Air's uniqueness, but also because the Air comes close to matching the performance of existing 13" MBPs. I think Apple will say that, for the time being, If you want a 13" laptop without a DVD drive, get the Air.

[]

I'd like to see a 13" MBP offered with the same processors as a 15" MBP for crunching large graphics intensive programmes such as video editing and speadsheets.

I don think the iGP in Sandy Bridge will be good enough for Apple to forego using Intels solution. Will it even support OpenCL, something Apple seems hellbent on including in every Mac even though its been unused since its inception?

I think youre right about the ODD staying for another round, but if that is the case then getting a Core-iX CPU and a dGPU are slim to none in those MBP cases.

Id like to see new 13 MBPs that mimic the MBAs taper, but being 1 at its thickest point at the back to allow for the cooling of the 35W Core-iX and dGPU, with ports on both sides and being about .3 inches at the front, with as much or more battery time than before. Hopefully they will use some of that extra space for a 2.5 HDD for storage, along with their SSD card for booting, but I think that would be too good to be true for me.

Quote:

I am also expecting new hi-resolution displays.

Im expecting the 13 MBP to get the resolution of the 13 MBA, but thats it for now. Unless Mac OS X Lion has RI or an intermediate layer that allows for decent scaling of element display resolutions could be in limbo for another version of Mac OS X. I sincerely hope that isnt the case.

Quote:

An unknown factor is whether Apple will now include USB 3.0. it is fast approaching prime time and the sooner Apple adopts it, the better IMO.

Would Apple use the NEC controllers? Would they use there own or someone elses, or just wait for Intel to get on board?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Implied

1TB SSD? Don't think it exists yet

Not too tough. You could put 2x 512GiB SSDs into a current notebooks by removing the ODD, for a total of 1024GiB. Or, use a 1TiB and 750TiB for 1.75TiB, or any combination you wish.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

The market is heading towards powerful low power processors and Intel is mostly interested in the high end.

Intel regards apple as a vital customer and are working to win back the mobile business. Apple and intel are also working together on some interesting Light Peak technologies that have potential to replace USB/Firewire.

Apple likes intel and can track their Mac sales increase to the switch to intel. Intel regards apple as a loyal customer because apple only uses their processors on the macs. Apple does not have cheaper alternatives similar to other PC manufacturers. Apple had no choice but to use their own silicon design because of power consumption issues that intel currently has. When intel catches up, i believe apple will happily give them the business back -- assuming the price is right.

[QUOTE=AppleInsider;1753060]
"Desktop chips will range from dual 2.5 GHz Core i3s to quad 3.4 GHz Core i7s. Regular notebooks will get dual 2.5GHz to 2.7GHz Core i5 and i7 chips in the first batch of processors, and desktop replacements will get quad 2.2GHz through to 2.5GHz Core i7s,"

quad 3.4Ghz i7 is going to be the fastest desktop CPU? what about the 6 core versions..... CPU clockspeeds have been stuck in the 3k's for a long time.... when are we going to see a 5ghz CPU on the Market or is this not possible due to thermal thresholds? (not counting intel turboboost). There are still many apps out there that do not utilise multiprocessing....

quad 3.4Ghz i7 is going to be the fastest desktop CPU? what about the 6 core versions..... CPU clockspeeds have been stuck in the 3k's for a long time.... when are we going to see a 5ghz CPU on the Market or is this not possible due to thermal thresholds? (not counting intel turboboost). There are still many apps out there that do not utilise multiprocessing....

5ghz... did u miss 4? anyways, look to the line after this, with a 22nm process for that speed.

i did find someone who managed to hit over5ghz with air cooling on an i7 though, huge ass fans.

PC means personal computer.

i have processing issues, mostly trying to get my ideas into speech and text.

"Desktop chips will range from dual 2.5 GHz Core i3s to quad 3.4 GHz Core i7s. Regular notebooks will get dual 2.5GHz to 2.7GHz Core i5 and i7 chips in the first batch of processors, and desktop replacements will get quad 2.2GHz through to 2.5GHz Core i7s,"

quad 3.4Ghz i7 is going to be the fastest desktop CPU? what about the 6 core versions..... CPU clockspeeds have been stuck in the 3k's for a long time.... when are we going to see a 5ghz CPU on the Market or is this not possible due to thermal thresholds? (not counting intel turboboost). There are still many apps out there that do not utilise multiprocessing....

There are no 6-core versions of Sandy Bridge, not for several quarters, at least. These are "mainstream" processors which cover the high-volume markets.

"Desktop chips will range from dual 2.5 GHz Core i3s to quad 3.4 GHz Core i7s. Regular notebooks will get dual 2.5GHz to 2.7GHz Core i5 and i7 chips in the first batch of processors, and desktop replacements will get quad 2.2GHz through to 2.5GHz Core i7s,"

quad 3.4Ghz i7 is going to be the fastest desktop CPU? what about the 6 core versions..... CPU clockspeeds have been stuck in the 3k's for a long time.... when are we going to see a 5ghz CPU on the Market or is this not possible due to thermal thresholds? (not counting intel turboboost). There are still many apps out there that do not utilise multiprocessing....

the GHz race is over and AMD won. you get much better performance increases by tweaking the architecture than ramping up the GHz

CPU clockspeeds have been stuck in the 3k's for a long time.... when are we going to see a 5ghz CPU on the Market or is this not possible due to thermal thresholds? (not counting intel turboboost). There are still many apps out there that do not utilise multiprocessing....

Obviously, a faster processor would execute machine instructions faster, which would finish a job quicker, but what application(s) do you use, or know of, that do not utilize multiprocessing, and would not benefit from multiprocessing?

So Intel's bundlegate continues unabated. Shovelling you useless GPUs while Nvidia and others still have no chance of using their chipsets or integrated GPUs.

Yes it sucks but on the otherhand AMDs offerings are not that bad ( well when they are finally ready for sale). You see integrating GPUs is the way of the future. If and when AMD realizes their complete vision with respect to Fusion it will be a very interesting world indeed. However that is a couple of years off.

The big question is this, will the new chip support OpenCL? If not I doubt Apple will be interested. In the end the GPU would be passable in something like a Mac Book if OpenCL was supported.

Quote:

Intel makes some great CPUs, but it's certainly stabbed a few people in the back on the way there. And now with Sandy Bridge, it's secured its stranglehold on mainstream and performance CPUs, and mopped up the low end GPU market at the same time.

Not really! Seriously would you go for a low end machine with an Intel GPU or one with an AMD GPU integrated on die? Especially when looking at a low end machine where a GPU is likely more important than the CPU. Intels position in the future is not assured, all one needs to see is viable competition from AMD.

Quote:

Looks like lower-end/ 11"/ 13" Macbook/Pros in 2011 will still continue to use Core 2 Duo.

Not at all. There is a good potential to see the AIRs upgraded to Bobcat based solutions. In fact I could see AMD doing a complete SoC solution for Apple. That would be a complete motherboard minus Flash and RAM integrated into a Bobcat based processor chip.

Of course such a chip doesn't exist yet but all Apple really needs to make Bobcat based Fusion products workable in AIRs is a little bit more speed or clock rate if you will. To go into a Mac Book they would need a lot more speed so that might be more of a stretch. For faster platforms AMD has Fusion chips coming for those too. AMD has a big chance for major design ins with the new products it has coming. Things Intel can't compete with without lowering the price on its bleeding edge products. I'd would even go so far as to say that the new AIRs realatively liw pricing is due to Apple looking forward to new hardware that gets them out from under Intels ULV pricing thumb.

Would it even be called i5? Sandy Bridge is a major architecture change, intel ought to focus on that when naming the product. Other wise you describe a machine that I would also love (with a few qualifications).

Those qualifications are:
1.
4 i86 cores! This doubles my current Mac Book Pro count and combined with clock rate increases and other efficiencies ought to leave me with a MBP that will last several years.
2.
Yes to the SSD however I want several slots for those blades. Seriously I want to be able to add internal storage as time goes on. Oh and ideally those modules would come in larger than 256GB sizes. Again this is a MBP and base storage needs to hit half a terrabyte.
3.
I do not want to give up battery life. Simple to say but all the new technologies ought to add up to an increase in battery life.

Quote:

But I have come to the stage where I wouldn't even know what I'd do with that speed at power.

Maybe you don't but it is possible Apple does. Things like IA, resolution independence and a Safari that takes advantage of all those processors comes to mind. Remember Apple is just starting to leverage SMP capabilities in its own apps.

Cannibalize means to eat ones own. iPad, therefore, cannot cannibalize PC margins. It could loosely be said to cannibalize Macs, if that were the case, as they are at least related by a common parent. But even that is stretching the language a bit.

Not being a PC, the iPad could be said to be preying on PCs (or, alternatively, eroding their margins). It would be accurate to say: the iPad and other tablets are beginning to prey on PC margins.

This doesn't tell us anything we didn't know already, but it's nice that Intel has now confirmed it. This is good news for the next MacBook Pro refresh.

That assuming all the new MBP will be using Intel hardware. I suspect that the 15" & 17" models will but the rest of the line up is a big question mark.

Quote:

I am sure we will see a new MBP line-up appear in January at an Apple event. it is not clear whether Apple versions of Sandy Bridge will get a discrete graphics processor, although it certainly looks likely for the 15" and 17" models based on past history and the weakness of Intel's own GPU modules.

For the two larger models I suspect we will be seeing separate GPUs for a long time. Be it an AMD or Intel chip the separate GPU still will offer worthwhile advantages for a couple of years.

Quote:

Given the 13" MBP's price-point, it could get a fully integrated Intel GPU, depending on whether Intel has been able to develop something better than existing options in this area of the market.

Honestly I think it depends upon one thing: OpenCL. If Intel does not support that well then Apple will implement options. With options being AMD or Intel with a descrete GPU. The thing is the 13" machine cries out for a highly integrated solution. Any space that Apple can free up for other uses is very valuable in a compact machine.

Quote:

With or without a discrete GPUs, we should see a worthwhile lift in performance for all MBPs.

Well all that end up with a Sandy Bridge based solution and assuming that the only thing of importance to you is the CPU. I would be very surprised to see Sandy Bridge in all MZbP upon first release of SB CPUs.

Quote:

I am guessing that Apple will not drop the internal DVD drive yet from any MBP model just yet, not only to maintain the MacBook Air's uniqueness, but also because the Air comes close to matching the performance of existing 13" MBPs.

Don't believe everything you read on the internet, the AIRs are very low performance machines when a program becomes CPU bound. In such situations the 13" MBP will run circles around the AIRs. Give the 13" MBP an SSD and a new processor and the AIR will never come close.

In any event for the most part I think you are right about the CD drives. The 13" is a possible exception, that simply due to its size.

Quote:

I think Apple will say that, for the time being, If you want a 13" laptop without a DVD drive, get the Air.

Or they could use the 13" to test the waters so to speak.

Quote:

What I really hope Apple does is make SSD hard drives standard in the MBP without ramping up the price too much. I'd like to see 256Gb, 512Gb and even a 1TB option (wonder what that would cost!). We certainly need larger capacity drives. My disk is full - full of photos, movies, music and other stuff downloaded from iTunes.

This blade concept of storage is very interesting. Honestly I'd like to see at least four slots for blade like storage devices. This for the simple reason to grow storage over time. It ought to be cheap to put the slots in and the actual cost of the blade devices will come down in time.

Quote:

If Steve wants us to continue shopping on iTunes, then he needs to give us more room to store our sh*t.

Yes this is becoming a big problem. An ITunes overhaul will help here.

Quote:

I am also expecting new hi-resolution displays.

Yep. The real question is how high.

Quote:

An unknown factor is whether Apple will now include USB 3.0. it is fast approaching prime time and the sooner Apple adopts it, the better IMO.

Yes I agree here too. While I don't see USB 3 as that significant of an update Appple needs to get on board soon to get it out of the way. Also the rumors are that AMD will be supporting USB 3 before Intel in its chip sets.

Quote:

I'd like to see a 13" MBP offered with the same processors as a 15" MBP for crunching large graphics intensive programmes such as video editing and speadsheets.

For a number of reasons it will trail the larger machines. Given the right chip though it could easily out class todays bigger MBPs.

Quote:

All in all, these will be fast machines with stunning screens that offer a slick user experience. The only downside is that the form factor will not have changed which means they'll weigh just as much as before.

It is a notebook except for getting thinner what could it do? I've never understood this fretting over form factor it really means nothing.

I don think the iGP in Sandy Bridge will be good enough for Apple to forego using Intels solution. Will it even support OpenCL, something Apple seems hellbent on including in every Mac even though its been unused since its inception?

You might not realize you use it, but OpenCL is used in a wide variety of the libraries in MacOS.

I don think the iGP in Sandy Bridge will be good enough for Apple to forego using Intels solution. Will it even support OpenCL, something Apple seems hellbent on including in every Mac even though its been unused since its inception?

This is complete garbage, OpenCL has recieve pretty strong acceptance as has the related GCD technologies. In any event that support has to be there for developers to use. Plus Apple needs that support for the OS.

In any event do you really expect people to stand up and wave their hands indicating their use of OpenCL for you? OpenCL is a good technology that has momentum.

Quote:

I think youre right about the ODD staying for another round, but if that is the case then getting a Core-iX CPU and a dGPU are slim to none in those MBP cases.

The 13" machine is the only one that I expect to see a huge overhaul where the optical gets dropped. Mostly because of the design options it opens up.

Quote:

Id like to see new 13 MBPs that mimic the MBAs taper, but being 1 at its thickest point at the back to allow for the cooling of the 35W Core-iX and dGPU, with ports on both sides and being about .3 inches at the front, with as much or more battery time than before.

A 35 watt CPU plus a discrete GPU in a 13" machine and you want better battery life. Hell I want a million dollars but I don't see that coming. The 13" machine is an ideal place for a Sandy Bridge or Fusion based implementation, but even 35 watts in one of these chips would be a lot. Then things like discrete USB 3 chips have to be considered which can be power hungry.

On top of all of that you have to consider to whom the 13" MBP gets marketed. It isn't the power user community but rather the long battery life community. Also people that prefer cool operation. Granted with the right mix of components they might be able to get good battery life but then you still have the heat.

Quote:

Hopefully they will use some of that extra space for a 2.5 HDD for storage, along with their SSD card for booting, but I think that would be too good to be true for me.

That is one approach that would certainly work. Personally I'm hoping for at least four slots for those blade like storage modules. Yeah it is a little thin capacity wise compared to a magnetic drive but with four slots your capacity costs get spread out over time. Besides in the near future two TBs would be easy in a laptop.

Of course if you need the capacity now, a normal disk form factor device makes more sense.

Quote:

Im expecting the 13 MBP to get the resolution of the 13 MBA, but thats it for now. Unless Mac OS X Lion has RI or an intermediate layer that allows for decent scaling of element display resolutions could be in limbo for another version of Mac OS X. I sincerely hope that isnt the case.

For us old guys RI would have to come. Sadly no rumors about that yet. However iPhones approach is interesting for a transitional solution.

Quote:

Would Apple use the NEC controllers? Would they use there own or someone elses, or just wait for Intel to get on board?

AMD?

Quote:

Not too tough. You could put 2x 512GiB SSDs into a current notebooks by removing the ODD, for a total of 1024GiB. Or, use a 1TiB and 750TiB for 1.75TiB, or any combination you wish.

I think you have an abreviation error there.

In any event the thing I like about the multiple blade approach is much the same as you describe, the ability to expand in random increments. One might order a MBP with 256GB of storage and the later add 512GB. With the combination of stacked wafers and higher density chips we might soon find 512GB or even 750GB SSD blades affordable. Hopefully Flash reliability won't go down the tubes.

I agree, the blade concept for SSDs is a game changer. Apple is I believe the largest buyer of 64GB SSD modules, so can influence pricing to some degree. An MBP with a 1TB SSD that didn't cost an arm and a leg, would be eagerly snapped up.

I realise that Sandy Bridge doesn't support USB 3.0 natively, so Apple may indeed use NEC controllers instead. We'll see other vendors offer USB 3.0 solutions, so it would make sense for Apple to get with the programme. i wonder how long it'll be before Intel includes it.

And, of course, Open CL is a key issue governing GPU choice. I just wonder if Intel has something up its sleeve that we don't know about with all this?

Anyway, this refresh could be the best reason to upgrade your MBP since the unibody enclosure arrived.

PS > Dave, I always like your posts. Always thoughtful. Always well expressed. Always respectful of other contributors. You add something to this board. Thank you.

I agree, the blade concept for SSDs is a game changer. Apple is I believe the largest buyer of 64GB SSD modules, so can influence pricing to some degree. An MBP with a 1TB SSD that didn't cost an arm and a leg, would be eagerly snapped up.

Apple certainly has purchasing power but they need to begin passing that power on to their customers. The price of incremental upgrades for both the iPad and the new AIRs is a little stiff in my estimation. 64GB SSDs can be had for as little as $120 these days, probably less if one shops real hard. Yet Apple wants to charge you $200 going from 16GB to 64GB. That is pretty stiff considering that the iPad doesn't have a high performance SSD.

Quote:

I realise that Sandy Bridge doesn't support USB 3.0 natively, so Apple may indeed use NEC controllers instead. We'll see other vendors offer USB 3.0 solutions, so it would make sense for Apple to get with the programme. i wonder how long it'll be before Intel includes it.

It is my understanding that you can now get standalone USB 3 controllers that are low power or have low power modes suitable for notebook computers, so at least that obstacle is gone. Apparently they only became available a couple of months ago, so at least it is possible to support USB 3 now on a portable.

Quote:

And, of course, Open CL is a key issue governing GPU choice. I just wonder if Intel has something up its sleeve that we don't know about with all this?

I've heard both yes and no, so who do you believe. I do know that the GPU core was completely redesigned for Sandy Bridge so it is certainly possible that some OpenCL support is possible. Of course then you have the question of just how well OpenCL code would perform on an Intel GPU if it did support the option.

Quote:

Anyway, this refresh could be the best reason to upgrade your MBP since the unibody enclosure arrived.

Yes very much so. This is why I recommend holding off purchases if you don't really need a new portable or for that matter a Mini. The potential is there for a major bump in performance.

Quote:

PS > Dave, I always like your posts. Always thoughtful. Always well expressed. Always respectful of other contributors. You add something to this board. Thank you.

No, thank you; but really the thought isn't justified you haven't seen me on my bad days!!!!! In any event, even though at times I'm very frustrated with Apple I now believe they are the best possible computer for many users. I still use Linux to some extent and of course Windows at work but my early 2008 MBP has made me a believer.

There are lots of reasons for that but I do believe that Apple listens to it's customers. I see the new MB Airs as an example of Apple taking a good idea and making it right for their customers. More so they seem to know when not to listen to their customers for example the iPad.

This is complete garbage, OpenCL has recieve pretty strong acceptance as has the related GCD technologies. In any event that support has to be there for developers to use. Plus Apple needs that support for the OS.

No, its not garbage. What Mac is shipping today with OpenCL. I cant think of any. Apple has made a point to require it on all their shipping Macs.

After looking more into Sandy Bridge, it appears that it could be the first to offer OpenCL support, thus making it a possibility for Apple to use, based on my aforementioned statement. Performance over their other IGP solutions is another consideration altogether.

Quote:

A 35 watt CPU plus a discrete GPU in a 13" machine and you want better battery life.

Absolutely. With a more power efficient processor and the loss of the ODD there is a more room for the battery, even whilst giving some of the space to other electronics. I wonder why you think a dGPU means that the battery life will have to go down. You should know that the system will be able to dynamically switch between the dGPU and IGP as it does now.

Quote:

On top of all of that you have to consider to whom the 13" MBP gets marketed. It isn't the power user community but rather the long battery life community.

hence my comment about increasing the battery, something you should realize is important to Apple.

Quote:

Personally I'm hoping for at least four slots for those blade like storage modules.

4 of these blades in notebook? Really?

Quote:

AMD?

There is no evidence that Apple would consider AMD for their chips.

Quote:

I think you have an abreviation error there.

Which abbreviation is that? GiB to refer to 2^30 instead of Gb to refer to 10^9? I wrote that way for a very specific reason.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

I've heard both yes and no, so who do you believe. I do know that the GPU core was completely redesigned for Sandy Bridge so it is certainly possible that some OpenCL support is possible. Of course then you have the question of just how well OpenCL code would perform on an Intel GPU if it did support the option.

OpenCL is a hardware abstraction layer for processors. It's raison d'être is to shift some types of processing tasks away from the CPU and onto the GPU.

Intel has the most powerful CPUs on the market, but lags in the GPU space. Logically, they would be against any technology that allows the GPU take over the tasks of the CPU.

In fact, there is no indication that Intel will ever support OpenCL properly. They are listed as a member of the Chronos Consortium, which administers OpenCL, but have only produced an initial implementation of OpenCL which runs on the *CPU*.

AMD is much more enthusiastic about OpenCL. Too bad Bobcat is a thoroughly low end product. Perhaps their future chips (Lanos?) will get serious consideration from Apple.

I wouldn't be so sure about that, AMD seems to definitely be interested in having either GPUs or CPUs in iMacs and Mac Pros, as you can see here. Well they already have ATI Graphics cards in, so they probably want to get an option to have an AMD Processor on iMacs and Mac Pros for whoever doesn't like Intel very much. They're also getting tough competition from Nvidia's new Quadro 4000 which Apple will start selling on the Apple Store very soon for Mac Pros, and they could use the extra profit from Apple selling AMD Processors.

Among other things AMD Processors could even possibly allow for USB 3.0 (Intel Processors not having support for them yet is one of the reasons Apple hasn't upgraded yet, along with LightPeak), even though Apple seems to want to aim straight towards LightPeak it would benefit them to have USB 3.0 on their Mac Pros and possibly high-end iMacs at the very least. Looks like even Apple is starting to ship OS X in USB Drives, or is planning to ship 10.7 Lion in this way. USB 3.0 is way faster than 2.0, and who doesn't like a faster Installation?

I mean sure, LightPeak is strong and fast but people will take time to upgrade, Apple will take a while to take off their next upgrades if they cut off USB entirely from their 2011 Macs and offer only LightPeak.

I wouldn't be so sure about that, AMD seems to definitely be interested in having either GPUs or CPUs in iMacs and Mac Pros, as you can see here. Well they already have ATI Graphics cards in, so they probably want to get an option to have an AMD Processor on iMacs and Mac Pros for whoever doesn't like Intel very much.

By chips I clearly mean CPUs, not GPUs, and by Apple I clearly meant Apple, not AMD.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

No, it’s not garbage. What Mac is shipping today with OpenCL. I can’t think of any. Apple has made a point to require it on all their shipping Macs.

What do you mean "ship with"; all of Apples computers ship with OpenCL support, it is part of the OS.

Quote:

After looking more into Sandy Bridge, it appears that it could be the first to offer OpenCL support, thus making it a possibility for Apple to use, based on my aforementioned statement. Performance over their other IGP solutions is another consideration altogether.

Yes it is hard to say what Sandy Bridge supports, especially the GPU. I've heard it both ways.

Quote:

Absolutely. With a more power efficient processor and the loss of the ODD there is a more room for the battery, even whilst giving some of the space to other electronics. I wonder why you think a dGPU means that the battery life will have to go down. You should know that the system will be able to dynamically switch between the dGPU and IGP as it does now.

Discrete GPUs come with their own RAM and generally a discrete subsystem take considerable power. At the rate you are going the PC could be consuming 60 or more watts total. That is a lot for a 13" machine that wants to be resonably thin and lite.

Quote:

hence my comment about increasing the battery, something you should realize is important to Apple.

Yes it is very important which is one reason why they don't use Arrandale in the small machines. The integrated GPU on Arrandale wastes a lot of power if you end up using something different for video anyways.

Quote:

4 of these blades in notebook? Really?

Why not? At least in the two larger notebooks. The modules are both narrow and thin, so they would be easy to implement. Unfortunately I didn't note that width but visually it looks like four would go into the space reserved for a CDROM. Maybe I can dig the info up later. Apple would certainly make a splash with this sort of capability

Quote:

There is no evidence that Apple would consider AMD for their chips.

Other than AMD just might outperform intel in limited situations.

Quote:

Which abbreviation is that? GiB to refer to 2^30 instead of Gb to refer to 10^9? I wrote that way for a very specific reason.

Didn't you say 750 TiB. By the way that is an European abbreviation I do not accept anyways. GB is fine.

Obviously, a faster processor would execute machine instructions faster, which would finish a job quicker, but what application(s) do you use, or know of, that do not utilize multiprocessing, and would not benefit from multiprocessing?

I'm mainly using Google Sketch Up and Autodesk 3DS Max for 3D Architectural Design. They use only 1 thread for general number crunching tasks and functions but this is sometimes very slow due to the complexity of geometry. Only when it comes to rendering output does multi processing kick in.